#Bookwright time to print pro
#Bookwright time to print professional

So it's impossible to say if your book is good or not without seeing it in person.įWIW, the 'linescreen' for Indigo's vary depending on the model (and newer models are better than older, the technology is getting better all the time). Not in terms of color gamut, in contone appearance nor how 'smooth' gradients appear.

#Bookwright time to print pro

When so setup, the output is very impressive but it will never hold a candle to a good ink jet from a pro printer. There's a good deal of maintenance and a good press operator has to keep an eye on many factors for this device to produce it's best output. They are for all practical proposes big color copiers. I've worked for years with shops using Indigo's. Is this issue seen on all images and over all the pages? If so, I'd ask for a reprint. I am pretty certain the graininess is not to do with paper texture. I left LR to export the images to Blurb, so I presume it did so with the optimal resolution. I appreciate it may not be soft-proofing proper, but it's there all the same. I was just concerned that I may have a photo book from a poor print run.

#Bookwright time to print professional

If the resolution of photo books is always poorer than individual prints from professional labs, then that's the way it is I won't pursue the matter. The question is, ought the resolution to be the same? I think I've convinced myself, at least, that the resolution of the photo book is much less than that of a standalone print from a lab. Put the actual photos side by side and you can still tell the difference, it would be obvious even to the untrained eye. I showed the close-up photos of the prints just to demonstrate the difference in resolution, which I don't think would have been visible on screen otherwise. But the point is not whether the half-toning itself is visible in the photo book (it is just about, but not very), but that the print in the photo book to me looks grainy. As I said in my first post, the print was sized 6x4 inches (approximately), so I am scaling up a bit. I have sent these photos to Blurb's customer support too, and am awaiting a response. What do you think? Am I being too pernickety? I chose the best paper – I think it was called Proline Pearl Photo. I opted for Blurb because it seemed to get the best reviews, and because it was helpfully integrated in the Book module of Lightroom. My question is, ought I expect this from a photo book? Or should I be expecting similar print quality to standalone prints from a lab? (Also it appears to be sharpened more, but that doesn't bother me so much.)

Overall, I would say it is a good reproduction.īut now take a look at how that very same photo was printed, at almost exactly the same size, in the Blurb photo book:Īs you can see, the half-toning is clearly visible, and it is noticeably grainier. Ignore the colour balance for now, and also ignore the reflections (it was a glossy print). Now, it turns out I had already had this photo printed at 6'x4' by a professional photo lab (Peak Imaging UK). Here, for instance, is one of the original photos, taken with a modern Voigtlander 20mm lens on a Nikon D5100: However, I was not so pleased with the graininess of the photos, which to me looks like poor printer resolution.

I spent a lot of time soft-proofing the images in Lightroom 5, and in general I was pleased with the colour reproduction in the final book. Recently I ordered my first photo book from Blurb. Hi everyone, I was hoping you could give me some advice on what to expect in terms of photo book quality.